Eddington's was an estimate of temperature of the universe based upon space debris being warmed by starlight. The starlight is still there warming away. So why isn't the Big Bang's contribution to the CMBR what is extra on top of starlight-warmed space debris?

I didn't know about other estimates of the stars contribution. My thinking was that part of the CMBR would be due to the warming of space debris by stars and galaxies. Or maybe all of it might be due to warming of space debris by stars and galaxies. []

herbaholic has an interesting point.that perhaps our iniverse was created by the collision of 2 other universe's in the "multi-verse" model of thinking.but that raises more questions than it answers. The original question bascically asks where did "everything"come from if there was nothing and "no-where/time/space" 4 it to be created "in".so if it did come from othet universes colliding in multi-universal/dimensions and such,WHERE DID THOSE UNIVERSES COME ABOUT TO EXIST? it's like saying,"where the hell did this baby come from,there was nothing here yesterday? oh,it came from mom and dad "colliding" [:I]" o.k.,where did mom and dad come from.so on so on so on..............into infinity. i recently posted a similiar question about "time-o" before the BB.if their are an infinite amount of universes in an infinite amount of dimensions that are infinitly colliding creating an infinite amount of other universes and dimensions,their still had to be a point of "THE ORIGINAL" or PRIME ONE.doesnt their?or does the BB just boil down to the age old paradoxal question,which came first,the chicken or the egg?Mind boggling to say the least. []

nepcon - I'm glad I'm not the only 1 whose brain hurts thinking about such things. It's not easy trying to get to grips with the concept of an event happening without somewhere or sometime for it to happen in.

It has been suggested here and in other places that as space & time came into existence at the moment of the Big Bang, what existed prior to that event is not describable in terms we can understand. I don't profess to understand some of those theories.

There is currently an experiment underway to study the CMBR with the aim of finding a signature of what existed before the Big Bang. But, as you rightly pointed out, we then have the problem of how did that (the pre-Big Bang state) get there.

Quote

which came first,the chicken or the egg?

The egg. Dinosaurs laid eggs and they were around a long time before chickens! []

I suppose being human I realise that there was a time when I did not exist but I understand others existed. If I resulted from a "big bang" or just normal sexual intercourse is not a thing I have ever asked my parents about, but surely something happened. Why it happened, is another thing I never dared ask my parents just is case it/I was a mistake and a matter of possible embarrassment.Scientists are in a similar situation so will not, cannot speculate as to what existed before the "Big Bang" so logically they are not in a position to dismiss any idea!Either way you look at it; everything started with a "big bang" or everything always existed neither answers the questions of how or why, but here we are. I can only think/feel we are missing something obvious like consciouness. To me there seems no point in there being anything if there is no consciousness of it at all anywhere, this doesn't have to be restricted to human consciouness.

I just cant believe in a big bang theory! there are infinite amounts of variables one can consider. Firstly it is impossible for there to be absolute "nothing" nothing is something, the concept of nothing cannot be described by a word.The universe is such a miracle, a part of human life that actually truly cannot be explained!Its as if life was a mistake as if we where never meant to be but we are. I don't think that humans for as long as we are on this planet will ever fully grasp what we know as space, we seek answers in theories and beliefs of extra terrestrial life. I understand that its naive to think that in our universe there is no other life but thats if you believe there is a universe, I watched a documentary on quantum physics and parallel universes and it gave me some insight into different possibilities.My theory of life is! is that we are in a see through box and aliens are playing a bullshit game with us!

Hi, new member here! Been exploring and came across this thread and have always pondered this question.After alot of research feel the answer lies outside our universe and inside black holes. As the universe expands, time is born so that matter can exist, before the expansion takes place time is not a factor so no events can occour and matter cannot exist.

THEORY OF ORIGIN

Black holes. As far as I know there is no way to calculate the amount of matter that a black hole can swallow, I'm hoping it is infinite...

As more and more massive stars become supernova and then black holes eventually there will be more black holes than there is matter in the universe, at that time black holes will be in relative proximity to each other thus causing mutual attraction through gravitational force. All the black holes will join together to make a supermassive black hole that will swallow all the matter in the universe!! Once this has happened then there will be no more universe so even the black hole will not exist as there will be no time for it to exist in.

At this point the previously confined and infinitely compressed hot matter in the singularity will be released again in the form of an explosion, (big bang) a new universe will be created. The time between this happening is some sort of limbo state where all known matter is compressed hugely and becomes very hot.

QUESTIONS

Was there ever a first big bang or is this "event" an infinite loop? That may sound stupid but we know that some things are infinite like space time curvature/ How could any mind comprehend that question? These questions seem to offer a magical solution, a godly presence that for me has to be logically denied.Lastly not understanding the process of space expanding, the actual physics behind time becoming a reality, what force is behind this? That one really gets me frustrated!

Was there ever a first big bang or is this "event" an infinite loop? That may sound stupid but we know that some things are infinite like space time curvature/ How could any mind comprehend that question? These questions seem to offer a magical solution, a godly presence that for me has to be logically denied.Lastly not understanding the process of space expanding, the actual physics behind time becoming a reality, what force is behind this? That one really gets me frustrated!

Thanks for reading, hope to hear some more scientific theories

I speculate a lot, and in so doing have described all the basic workings of the universe, to my own satisfaction, but not to the satisfaction of anyone else. So I hesitate to post the speculative notions. But since you ask:

My speculation about the universe is that it has existed forever. Black holes don't exist, but almost black holes do. These almost black holes are recycling machines which come into existence at the centre of galaxies and convert everything, including heavy metals, into pure energy. These monsters squirt this energy out in beams perpendicular to their accretion disks. The energy and energetic particles collide in the far reaches of space and matter accumulates from these collisions.

So, to me, the universe is a gigantic recycling entity, constantly changing matter to energy and energy to matter in an endless process.

I just had a thought, believe it or not [] I'm not quite proficient enough in the maths to come to a solid conclusion, but it seems to me that time, being part of the equation of acceleration, would limit gravity and so prevent massiveness from accumulating to the extent of a singularity.

This should limit gravity in a similar way as the speed of light limits mass to speeds less than c.

There seem to be a statistical approach to our universe. What is possible at a quantum level, as for example Jim Bobs thread about atoms bouncing away faster than they collided due to the internal 'movements' inside the atoms gets 'equalized' in our macroscopic world. That is to me a clear indication of there existing different rules for a 'quantum world' and our own. You can see the same type of principle ruling for example 'dead' and 'living' matter.

There are a lot of 'transitional' evidence pointing to different 'states' of existing. If we to that add chaos theory and the idea of it not being possible to 'backtrack' its so called bifurcations aka 'way paths/splits' then you will have a universe where we will have to create a theory from 'scratch' without really knowing if it will lead to our universe at all. Even if we succeeded in experimentally creating such a primeval 'state' that we expect to lead to a 'Big Bang' or similar there will be a much higher statistical probability for the 'bifurcations' creating a spacetime to choose another paths, creating something very unlike our own.

The only way to expect it otherwise, that I can see, is if there would be 'hidden' nature constants forcing our universe as the most probable outcome. There seems to be such in Chaos theory, I don't remember who found one but I remember that he spent a lot of governmental money flying looking at clouds A very bright guy actually.

That is to me a clear indication of there existing different rules for a 'quantum world' and our own. You can see the same type of principle ruling for example 'dead' and 'living' matter.

I think the rules are the same; it is just that for probability to function correctly you need lots of stuff. It is like trying to think of a single wave length of light. When we are accustomed to thinking in terms of probabilities and Fourier transforms, a vision of a single wave length doesn't materialize in the mind.

The concept of 'before' implies TIME. If you are considering a region (not a time) in which the idea of time does not apply, then you can't use time - based words, such as 'before', with which to discuss it.

So if we cant used time based words to speak theoreticly about "the big bang" what words can we use? What if there was something there before the big bang, would we then change when time started? Were saying that before the big bang there was nothing but it is only a theory, im sure everyone here has a theory of how the universe came into existance, but i don't think that there was ever nothingness. Is infinity not a posiblity to anyone? can nothing last forever? what about us, i know our bodys decay when we die but then the soil absorbs us, we become pasrt of many things, they die and make many more, maybe something like that hapens with universes... maybe not, only my view on the matter

The concept of 'before' implies TIME. If you are considering a region (not a time) in which the idea of time does not apply, then you can't use time - based words, such as 'before', with which to discuss it.

So if we cant used time based words to speak theoreticly about "the big bang" what words can we use? What if there was something there before the big bang, would we then change when time started? Were saying that before the big bang there was nothing but it is only a theory, im sure everyone here has a theory of how the universe came into existance, but i don't think that there was ever nothingness. Is infinity not a posiblity to anyone? can nothing last forever? what about us, i know our bodys decay when we die but then the soil absorbs us, we become pasrt of many things, they die and make many more, maybe something like that hapens with universes... maybe not, only my view on the matter

~sHiMmY

I have a answer to these basic questions. The simple visual images help understand a theory of a build-up of matter before the Big Bang.

If the galaxy and all that exists was created by the big bang, then what created the big bang? Surely there was nothing in existence before the big bang took place, and nothing in existence for the big bang to take place in the first place, simply because nothing existed.

So how then did it take place if there was nothing before it? What was existence before the big bang?

What I'm getting at, basically, is how did something come from nothing? (maybe I don't understand the concept correctly?)

What do you think?

======================Before “ big bang “ was God.And the God created the Universe and everything.I now only two ways to explain this fact.1)The action, when the God compresses all Universe into his palm, we have named " a singular point". And action, when the God opens his palm, we have named the "Big Bang".

The Catholic Church agrees with this idea.Look: newbielink:http://discovermagazine.com/2004/feb/cover/ [nonactive]

2)At first God ( according to Quantum theory ) used the Vacuum ( T= 0K ) to create “ virtual particles “ and they ( according SRT + QED and GRT ) created the Universe and Everything in this Materialistic Universe.

hi friend,of course, catholic church would agree with this cause, this theory involves God, however this is not physics anyways i thing , before big bang, i think their must be a larger or smaller body with infinite energy and exploded, giving rise to the big bang , i may be wrong

But of course matter and anti matter were not created in precisely with same quantities otherwise all would have disappeared.Due to this in-balance a "little" bit of matter was left over that now forms our universe.

Actually, I don't think that there needed to be an imbalance in the amounts of matter and antimatter that were created to end up with the matter universe we have now. All that was needed was for a tiny amount of both to not meet each other and mutually annihilate.

In terms of probability, which is more likely?

1. Unequal amounts of matter and antimatter were created and 100% of antimatter was annihilated.

2. Equal amounts of matter and antimatter were created but less than 100% annihilation occurred.

Afaik, there are some problems in ending up with unequal amounts of matter and antimatter without invoking additional factors, and the chances of 100% of anything occurring seem slim to me, so I'm totally undecided on this 'matter' []

Logged

...And its claws are as big as cups, and for some reason it's got a tremendous fear of stamps! And Mrs Doyle was telling me it's got magnets on its tail, so if you're made out of metal it can attach itself to you! And instead of a mouth it's got four arses!

Actually, I don't think that there needed to be an imbalance in the amounts of matter and antimatter that were created to end up with the matter universe we have now. All that was needed was for a tiny amount of both to not meet each other and mutually annihilate.

In terms of probability, which is more likely?

1. Unequal amounts of matter and antimatter were created and 100% of antimatter was annihilated.

2. Equal amounts of matter and antimatter were created but less than 100% annihilation occurred.

Afaik, there are some problems in ending up with unequal amounts of matter and antimatter without invoking additional factors, and the chances of 100% of anything occurring seem slim to me, so I'm totally undecided on this 'matter' []

Yup!

Probably the creation process was too violent, matter & it's anti-matter counterpart got pushed away far from each other, making inhalation process much less probable. And it's a fact that in vacuum, matter are very far away from each other. (Please refer matter density / cm3 in the vacuum of intergalactic space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum [Links inactive - To make links active and clickable, login or click here to register])